A and UK shifting politically to the left now.
John Mearsheimer is interviewed by Australian media on New Cold War. Mearsheimer being the realist sometimes is perceived by many as being more honest and more insightful, at least compared with the hypocritical neoliberalists or even the neocons. But that can be quite deceiving, he can be just spreading a lot of disinformation and misinformation, in this case about China. His being honest can be disarming to some people, for example, his arguments that China can be as threatening to the East Asia as a regional hegemony as the US is in the western hemisphere. His admission of the US being bully in its own region is by no means a convincing argument that China would behaving the same backed up by any evidence. In fact, the exact opposite is true because China had been dominant in East Asia for thousands of years and had never really behaved as the US did in its region, as pointed out many times by former Prime Minister of Malaysia Mahathir Mohamad. His claim that China's Wolfie Diplomacy towards Australia is just classic "reversing black and white" as I pointed out many times in this and other threads before that Australia took the initiative and offensive against China first. There are many more of these kinds of example.
In fact, Mearsheimer's key, so-called realist, point of view can be boiled down to: in order to preserve US hegemony, the end justifies the means. The main difference between his arguments and majority of other western "chattering class" is that he doesn't bother to hide the real aim behind such rhetoric such as "rules-based international order," "democracy vs autocracy." etc. etc.
In fact, Mearsheimer's key, so-called realist, point of view can be boiled down to: in order to preserve US hegemony, the end justifies the means. The main difference between his arguments and majority of other western "chattering class" is that he doesn't bother to hide the real aim behind such rhetoric such as "rules-based international order," "democracy vs autocracy." etc. etc.
first time I ever saw Mearsheimer publically falling apart a bit when he was asked why shouldn't AU just fall in line with China due to trade. He is very smart. I am pretty sure deep down he is not nearly as certain as he appear to be that the many so called 'allies' will align with the US. No one wants to be the next Ukraine or Cuba.
His conclusion on US military advantage in the W Pacific is pretty weak too, which all seems to boil down to superier subs. Even if the US does maintain some military superiority, "it the economy, stupid!" His arguement about the US winning over previous great powers is nothing but a simple projection. Because we won the last few times so we will win this time. I find it degrading for a scholar to say that. There is next to no substance offered to back it up.
Lastly, so far there is no evidence China will "dominate" any one like the US did. The really funny thing is that in the end he argued that if AU doesn't fall in line, the US will roll over it because the US is the real hegemon. Damn right!
there were some statements from penny wong and albo. Not particularly strong but sided with US as expected.
There came a new statement couple days ago urging China to cease the exercises.
ABC interviewed US Deputy Secretary of State Wendy Sherman yesterday - she was trying very hard to downplay the Pelosi visit, describing her as a 'member of the US Congress'. The cheek.
She also sounded some very omnious warnings for the Solomon Islands. Methinks that a 'colour revolution' is going to happen there soon, or at least the State Department, CIA and the NED are going to start fermenting unrest over there.